Abstract
• Literacy instruction in rural schools varies widely in terms of technology use and access. • Large-scale quantitative studies fail to capture differences between local contexts. • Teacher technology training is essential but difficult to implement in rural schools. This article presents institutional case studies of technology use in language and literacy instruction at two rural high schools based on almost two months of classroom observations as well as interviews with teachers, administrators, and students. The first school presented faced a number of funding issues and clearly lacked in terms of access—the teachers regularly expressed frustration with district leadership and lamented their ability to have students do more computer-based literacy work. The second school presented had a very different issue—through a series of grants, they had secured computers for every student in their English classes but teachers had varying level of training on how to incorporate them in learning and consequently, the computers were often used in reductive ways. This research provides a perspective that shows the limitations of large-scale comparisons, emphasizing how local contextual factors (such as school leadership and teacher training) can shape both access and use. It also shows how access is only one piece of the picture—without sufficient teacher training and support, available technology may help perpetuate reductive educational practices in language and literacy instruction .
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.